20 Dictating the Internet: Necessity and proportionality Any restriction must be for a legitimate purpose, and, in the express terms of article 19(3), must be necessary, and the least restrictive means, to achieve that purpose. The principles of necessity and proportionality must therefore guide the restriction or limitation on the right to free expression or opinion, even where a legitimate purpose has been identified for such limitation. The UN Human Rights Committee clarifies that the test of necessity entails that limitations cannot be imposed where protection can be provided through other measures that do not restrict fundamental freedoms, while the test of proportionality guides that limitations should be proportionate to their function, not be overboard and be the “least intrusive instrument amongst others to achieve their protective function”.39 States seeking to impose such limitations must “demonstrate in specific and individualized fashion the precise nature of the threat, and the necessity and proportionality of the specific action taken, in particular by establishing a direct and immediate connection between the expression and the threat”.40 Restrictions must “not put in jeopardy the right itself” and be implemented narrowly for the legitimate purposes provided for under article 19.41 With respect to the protection of the right to freedom expression where States act to place limitation based on national security objectives, the UN Human Rights Committee has explained that “extreme care must be taken” by States to ensure that “treason laws and similar provisions relating to national security, whether described as official secrets or sedition laws or otherwise are crafted and applied in a manner that conforms to the strict requirements” of article 19(3) of the ICCPR.42 It has also given guidance that “in circumstances of public debate concerning public figures in the political domain and public institutions, the value placed by the Covenant upon uninhibited expression is particularly high”.43 Similarly, the UN Human Rights Council in its Resolution 12/16 has stressed that States should refrain from limiting “discussion of government policies and political debate; reporting on human rights, government activities and corruption in government; engaging in election campaigns, peaceful demonstrations 39 40 41 42 43 CCPR/C/GC/34, CCPR/C/GC/34, CCPR/C/GC/34, CCPR/C/GC/34, CCPR/C/GC/34, paras 33 to 35. para 35. paras 21, 22. para 30. para 38.